Copyright violations: are they valid?

I couldn't find your email in the profile.

There's no fixed format. Use any TV show as a guide. I prefer to use opening credits but they can be placed at the end as well. Just label what you use by what it's called: stock footage, media, music, or whatever (photographs, songs, pictures, "pics" - as formal or as informal as you please). If it has a title, use that also or instead, and provide the preferred name — individual or company — of the provider. Some titling uses "Special Thanks" for crediting "contributors". Given the proper credit, it will usually be assumed that you have permission to use the media, but I tend to "spell things out" for youtube by expressly stating "used with (or by) permission". If you have a production name, use that for the work: produced by < > or just stick the copyright line on the video [ ©2013 by < >]. The copyright symbol on the mac is at Option-g. Even if you use the word copyright, the symbol, and the year produced, must accompany the "tagline": copyright ©2013 by ...... You can put these things anywhere. Titling is just another creative aspect of video production. It used to be the sole job of many companies in the past.

Applying copyright IS optional... every original work is *assumed* to be copyright by the creator. However, leaving it out tends to be ambiguous, especially if you incorporate the work of others, even IF you have permission to do so. So, in that respect, the visual copyright and credits removes all ambiguity. It looks "more professional." It makes sites like YouTube much more comfortable about the work you are posting because it removes all the risk from them—and for the people who created content that you used, it's very much appreciated that they have been acknowledged. There's no "legalese" involved — just tell the truth. If you use copyright, the only requirement is ©<year>... It means "you mean business" about protecting your work, your production, your "baby." 😉

1) you've been given the impression that you can use these loops in all your productions, both personal and commercial.

This is essentially true... however: f you read the fine print (several times, and slowly 😉 )

2) you're not supposed to use any Apple Loops from 3rd parties without providing appropriate credit (IN the work in which it is used; not the "about" or "description"; not anywhere apart from the work itself.)

Shows us the fine print please, because I'm sure we've been over this before. And you are comptetely wrong.

3) You are not supposed to use any Apple Loop "standalone" in its "entirety" -- in other words, you cannot provide any other party to be able to download/copy the Loop so that it is in the same condition provided to you... You need to "ruin" it in some way (voiceover, or add other content to change it in some way.)

Wrong again. You misunderstand the clause that tries to prevent reselling the piece on and take it to mean you can't even use it without changing it. That would be very stupid, don't you think, if what you're saying here is true? That's a rhetorical question.

Please refrain from giving this advice unless you really know it to be true (not just guessing from your own interpretation of the fine print)

All right...

[*I purposely broke some sections up into more readable chunks, but I have not altered the wording]

From the Apple Logic Studio Software License Agreement:

Under 1) General:

Title and intellectual property rights in and to any content displayed by or accessed through the Apple Software belongs to the respective content owner. Such content may be protected by copyright or other intellectual property laws and treaties, and may be subject to terms of use of the third party providing such content. This License does not grant you any rights to use such content nor does it guarantee that such content will continue to be available to you.

My interpretation of "standalone" is that Apple wants to prevent the loops being resold or redistributed *as audio or music files*.

Whether you can use a loop unaltered as a video soundtrack seems more grey. Video is not mentioned here, presumably because this fine print is from Logic Studio, a sound program. Do you have the equivalent fine print for iMovie or FCP?

In terms of Section E - "enabling" others to copy etc - the issue would be whether "enabling" includes "failure to protect/prevent" someone from copying. If it does, then it could be argued that uploading a video with an unaltered, complete Apple loop as its soundtrack "enables" someone to get hold of that loop in its original form (by re-ripping it).

I would argue against this interpretation personally. But different jurisdictions may take a different view.

Your first sentence is the correct interpretation.

You can use the loops in any way you want so long as you don't sell them individually or give them away.

Provided they are included in some video or music track with other items (eg. as part of an artistic/commercial product) you are using them correctly.